Now consider how dangerous it is for me when the spokesman for this Islamic lobby, with countless connections to terrorism, asserts this prima facie libelous mischaracterization about me – an Arab-American seen by some in the Arab world as a traitor because of his pro-American stands, his commitment to Jesus Christ and his defense of the Jews.

Hooper put a target on my back.

As I blogged yesterday, Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR had dismissed the new WND book Why We Left Islam with the accusation that Farah had once suggested that pig’s blood should be air-dropped across Afghanistan. Farah denies this, although he fails to tell us that he did once publish a column by another author suggesting that the US should drop leaflets over the country threatening to put pig’s blood into Kabul’s water supply (this was in late September 2001). Of course the inaccuracy should be corrected, but Hooper’s garbled version hardly amounts to putting “a target” on Farah’s back. However, Farah is desperate to generate a controversy around the book, hence the feeble suggestion of some kind of threat to his person.

Farah goes on to ponder the possibility of legal action, asking us questions like “Will I get a fair shake in America’s politically correct courtrooms?” and “Are there sharp lawyers brave enough to take my case?” He also commends Michael Savage’s legal efforts against CAIR:

As I blogged at the time, Savage’s original legal suit was dismissed in March, although he was allowed to submit an amended version. However, if Farah finds being accused of anti-Muslim hate so objectionable, why he so keen to identify with a man whose whole reputation is based on vulgar rants about Muslims “getting on…all-fours and braying to Mecca” and suchlike?

Since WND is less a “news” website than a platform to advance the personal views and agenda of its founder and editor — Farah — it’s a logical assumption that Farah condones, if not approves, such actions. For Farah to narrowly defend himself and portray CAIR’s claim as completely baseless is disingenuous and a cynical attempt to sell books.

And as for Farah’s demand that the New York Daily News, which printed Hooper’s comment, should give him right of reply, Krepel

The threat from Islamic extremism is easily identified; the threat from demagogues and opportunists who wrap themselves in “patriotism” is often more difficult to discern. Savage in particular appeals to the basest instincts and prejudices, and as such has nothing sensible to offer.

My Book Reviews

Note on Attacks

Anyone who comments on current affairs on-line risks being smeared by attack sites and/or abusive Tweets. This is particularly so if one chooses to challenge dishonesty or other kinds of reprehensible behaviour.

As a result of making a stand in a few particular instances, I have become the focus of a number of such attacks. Those who have targeted me include: a Nigerian evangelist who believes in “child witches”; former activists with the EDL; a man with a long history of bad debt and grandiosity; a sockpuppeting tabloid journalist; and a self-serving “celebrity” MP who deploys smears to discourage scrutiny.

The bad faith of such sites and Tweets ought to be self-evident. However, any readers interested in the true background can read this and this.